Its a pretty specialized lens, and not for general use. It is extremely susceptable to flare, and can grab stray light where you would swear it did not exist.If you are able to take the time to wait for the right lighting conditions to avoid flare, its a super lens. If you are impatient, you might be frustrated.Using a fully manual setup pretty much requires a lot of patience, and trial / error exposure.

Logged

weekendshooter

BullS___. It's by far the best wide zoom available. I rented it for 2 weeks on a trip home to Chicago and its an absolutely superlative lens. In fact I took it as my only walkaround lens on my D700 for a full day and was stunned by the results. You Canon fanboyz love to bash on Nikkor glass but the truth is that you would all kill for a wide zoom this good.

BullS___. It's by far the best wide zoom available. I rented it for 2 weeks on a trip home to Chicago and its an absolutely superlative lens. In fact I took it as my only walkaround lens on my D700 for a full day and was stunned by the results. You Canon fanboyz love to bash on Nikkor glass but the truth is that you would all kill for a wide zoom this good.

Ah, he's not saying that it is "bad glass" or anything of the sort, rather that it requires very specific conditions to ensure that you get good results from it. You wouldn't use it, for example, to take photos of your kids at home, or of animals on safari, or ... and the curvature of the front element introduces risks that might not ordinarily be present. For me, I'll never use a lens like this - regardless of who's name is on it - as it just doesn't have what I want in a lens (a flat front element being one of those things.)

Three years ago when i switched from Nikon to Canon, I had and kept a Nikon 14-24. I loved that lens and it was the single biggest thing holding me back from the switch. i used it on my 5D2 with a converter, including a focus confirmation chip.

If this lens required care and lighting conditions, or was somehow "specialized" nobody told me. I loved the thing and used it all the time. In the end i sold it for a couple reasons. The first was the manual focus drove me nuts. The second was my 17mm Tilt Shift.... Love that lens even more.

Logged

weekendshooter

but it's a complete fallacy that it requires "specific conditions" - I did in fact use it to take pictures of my girlfriend during a day out in downtown Chicago and it performed admirably. It's just as easy to handle and is as well-balanced as my 24-70 and exhibits flare when any other lens would. I can't fit it into my budget right now as wide shooting is not my forté but I will add it to my kit as soon as I can afford one - nobody else has a wide zoom that's sharp corner to corner at 14mm.

To set the scene, I own 2 x 1Dx, 1 x 5DMK3, 1 x 1DMK4 + 2 x 5DMK2 plus a load of Canon Primes & Zooms. I also own the D800 and a few Nikkor WA Lenses purely for Underwater Photography & the 105 Macro. Prior to taking the plunge on the D800, I purchased the 14-24 f/2.8 WA Zoom, plus the Novoflex Adaptor for EOS Cameras. What the adaptor does is allows you to use the Lens on Canon EF Cameras, you retain all but the ability to auto focus, other than the Manual focus the lens works just as it would on the D800 or any other Nikon Camera.

Why would you do it ? this is simply a superb Lens, no other way to describe it, sharp with a wonderful WA zoom range that Canon just don't have, yet. Flare ? yes of course, it's a super WA lens, I own the following Canon WA lenses 14 f/2.8 L II, 15 f/2.8, 8-15 f/4L, 16-35 f/2.8 L II, 24 f/1.4 L II, 24-70 f/2.8 L II, all of these Lenses will show Lens Flare under the conditions where the front element is not shaded or you have direct sunlight entering the front element, some are worse then others, but they all have the same basic physics where light passes through Glass.

I currently mostly use the 14-24 Nikkor on my D800 for Underwater work, I still use the Lens on my Canon 5DMK3 for set landscape work where the Manual Focus isn't an issue, I'll continue to do so until Canon finally produce something in the WA Zoom that can compete on an IQ basis. Is it worth purchasing for WA work on an EOS System when you can only use Manual Focus ?, I think it is, I use the 17 TSE II & 24 TSE II and these are both Manual Focus, simply requires patience and the right set up, will I be happier when Canon produce their 14-24 ?? Yep, you bet, as long as it's as superb as the Nikkor 14-24, they're tools, not children.

Logged

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing

Its a pretty specialized lens, and not for general use. It is extremely susceptable to flare, and can grab stray light where you would swear it did not exist.If you are able to take the time to wait for the right lighting conditions to avoid flare, its a super lens. If you are impatient, you might be frustrated.Using a fully manual setup pretty much requires a lot of patience, and trial / error exposure.

I'm a landscape guy and when I shoot Canon I typically use the 17 TSE which has the same curved lens, the 24 TSE (all TSE's are manual focus just the the Nikon 14-24 using a Novoflex converter on a Canon camera). I have but don't use the 14mm Canon because the 17 seems much sharper. All curved lenses need you to ensure that side light doesn't get in the lens. Since I shoot mostly live view, I am pretty familiar with keeping out lens flare. Since I depend on histograms and raw shooting, exposure is no big deal. I know about where F8 and F11 are on the Novoflex slide switch with the 14-24. Why use the 14-24? It is just a great lens with a wide zoom range and equal or better than the Canon prime TSE lenses. I never will give it up. I'm still waiting for Canon to make a high MP camera to better the Nikon D800E. The D800E is what I'm using for really all my landscapes and the 14-24 is my go to lens if I don't need the perspective control features for the composition. If I do, then I go to their PCE 24mm. Right now, the Canon 17 and 24 mark 2 lenses certainly have the Nikon PCE lenses beat. Now for a camera to match?